Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Jeremiah Cornelius writes "Wal-Mart — the retail king of Big Data analytics — will be meeting Mark Zuckerberg for two days in Bentonville, to 'deepen' their relationship with Facebook. The CEO-level strategy summit is intended to bolster the relationship between the world's No. 1 social network and the world's largest retailer. Wal-Mart has been left in the dust online by the behemoth Amazon. An alliance may be poised to challenge this dominance, particularly in light of Amazon's planned foray into same-day delivery nationwide. The companies share James Breyer, who sits on the boards of both Facebook and Wal-Mart. Adding another angle to this, Yahoo's new CEO, Marissa Mayer, was elected to Wal-Mart's board in early June, while she was still at Google. Earlier this month, Facebook and Yahoo settled a patent dispute and announced plans to form another 'strategic alliance' involving advertising and distribution. The implications for online privacy in this series of relationships are uncertain."

I always hear a lot of negative things about Walmart, but I have no problem with them. They don't do anything that other stores are not equally guilty of. So if I boycotted Walmart for being "evil" then I'd have to boycott all the stores, and have nowhere left to shop.

The man who founded Walmart wanted to provide good products at a low price, so the low-income people in rural America could afford to live a middle-income lifestyle. James Cash Penney had a similar mission when he was a young man (his first store was called The Golden Rule... referencing the bible). After these men died both of their stores made mistakes, but they still follow the same root goal: Provide products at reasonable prices which people can afford to buy. Jeans for $15, shirts for $10, TVs for $100, food at 10-20% less than other stores, and so on.

"I worked at Walmart for a summer. To what poor treatment was I supposedly subjected?"

Unlivable wages, and if you deny they pay garbage and they most CERTAINLY can afford more then you're delusional. I live right near a walmart and no one working their makes enough to save for a rainy day.

Or he/his family did not live in the US for long. Yea, *your* parents had job security and livable wages for many years.

My parents had to work multiple jobs to support the family while they're teenagers. Never had a chance to go into post secondary education of course.

My grandfather even had to abandon all his wealth (and from what I heard, he had a lot) when the Communists came. Ran out the back door and had to swim across a river with nothing but the shirt on his back. Lost everything. No security there.

This guy is just another slash dot asshole who thinks a guy who pushes a broom deserves as much pay as the president because socialism or whatever you want to call it is on the rise. They think under anything but capitalism and hard work everyone will be equal.Ha ha ha yeah equally stupid, lazy and poor.

Although I have more respect for a guy working at Walmart than some welfare bum any day, most Walmart people where I live are dumber than most slash dot people and that says a lot.

My brother used to work at walmart too.. He would sometimes be the ONLY employee in the back half of the store, during the christmas rush, because employees were sent home after 39 hours of work for the week, no exceptions.. He would also ask for time off, months in advance, and then when they built the schedule a week or two before, they would put him down to work it, and threaten to fire him if he didn't.. I hear thats changed in the last few years..

I had a boss do that once, I surprised the hell out of everyone when I showed up at work. (My brother, Maharishi Bob, was a sight when he dropped by later as I'd given him my ticket. Mick Jagger threw a bucket of water at him.)

That's a nice religious belief you have there, but not true. I worked for a local "independent" store and it never did pay me for my last week of work. I entered my time in the timecard, but the manager never apprroved it, so no paycheck was ever issed. POINT: Independent stores can be just as evil as Walmart, and because they are low-profile, get away with it.

It's not an excuse to treat employees badly, but, if it's bad enough there is nothing forcing people to work there. Possibly the alternative is no job at all, in which case walmart is still a step up. As for driving competitors out for the market: welcome to capitalism.

Crock of shit. Let me repeat that, crock of lying shit. First, I've worked at a walmart about 9 years ago. One of the first to open in Southern Ontario after they bought out Woolco I was treated better, and paid nearly $6/hr more than min. wage. Second, the quality of the management vastly improved. Especially after the corporate office went through and cleaned house. This has apparently held true, as a buddy of mine is working at the same store(which is now a super centre) and still paying $6/hr more than min. wage.

His other job, well he works at a gas station. He makes around $1/hr over min. wage. His employer like many others up here treats him like dirt, there's no other work options available either, as no one else is hiring. The biggest whiners seem to be the angsty teenagers who don't show up for their shifts, and then wonder why they don't get any hours. Well..duh, they're not reliable.

Only because Walmart has used its size to drive independent competitors out of the market.

I keep hearing that, but funny enough independent competitors around here in this city of ~40k seem to be doing just fine. Even the small businesses, in fact if anything, they seem to be doing more business now than they did 10 years ago. As the walmart has brought more business in from outlying areas. Other cities seem to be "suffering" the same fate up here, they're busier now than before. One can only hope Target does the same thing.

Stores that pay better also employ a different class of people. My local Walmart has one employee in a wheelchair, another looks like she has Down's Syndrome, several are elderly, none are very bright. These people are on the bottom rung of the economic ladder. Walmart is helping society by making these people employable. Other stores may pay more, but is it really a good thing for our society that they employ bright, capable people as floor sweepers and shelf stockers?

" Other stores may pay more, but is it really a good thing for our society that they employ bright, capable people as floor sweepers and shelf stockers?"

Um, if they pay them a living wage, then why not? Forgive me if I have the outdated notion that when I go to a hardware store and ask a question, I would like a thoughtful answer, not the generic "I don't know" and shoulder shrug that is more and more common in these big box stores. Forgive me for thinking employees should have a basic knowledge about their

Spoken like someone who's never had trouble making ends meet. Walmart gives great benefit to society by giving poor people better lifestyles than they could otherwise afford. Walmart gives great benefit to society by giving poor people better joibs than they could otherwise get. But most importantly, Walmart gives great benefit to society by causing mental anguish to clueless hipsters.

You need to look beyond the bare economics for the consumer to see what all the hidden costs are. Wal-mart stuff is cheaper, but it's also of far inferior quality, which means you need to replace the stuff far more frequently, which means more and more needs to be produced, which ends up costing the consumer the same amount in the end and meanwhile is polluting the shit out of the Asian countryside. Food is cheaper because it comes from massive corporations who are up to their necks in government subsidie

I think Wal-mart's shoddy generic imported merchandise is equivalent to the similar shoddy merchandise available at every other store in my region. It is hard work to find any good quality, e.g. I drive to San Leandro for German wrenches &c. (I can remember when small foundries were still scattered around the U.S.A. competing in that market.)

"The man who founded Walmart" would most likely despise what his company has become, or I guess love it because he can start a NewMart that can offer even lower prices by actually having literal slave labor create goods for his virtual wage slaves. The moment Sam Walton died the jackals came in and took what was a well intended idea (having US manufacturers compete with foreign by lowering costs) and turned it into the poster child of corporate greed and scumbaggery: Lowering the standards of living for

Wal-Mart's website sucks on a level that is so difficult to describe I would simply advise visiting it to see for yourself.

It's like someone took a hundred teenagers and told them to build a retail website. Nothing fits together right, product descriptions are wrong, incomplete, confusing, and difficult to read. The site itself is difficult to navigate. The search engine is a joke.

All that comes together to create this conglomeration of a website that doesn't fit together well and has no hope of building an online community - which is what it takes for any website to be successful.

The only exception might be their photo website, which I would give a C if I were to grade it. It's at least functional - though for the world's largest retailer, it's much less than anyone would expect.

They also are failing to use their biggest advantage - they've got DCs and retail fronts EVERYWHERE. Yet their shipping is not competitive at all, let a lone their prices. More often then not, you can save a substantial amount of money visiting their store vs online. Their marketing on their own website is terrible, too.

I'm not sure what facebook is going to do for them, I think it shows how out-of-touch with their own failings the corporations executives are. Clearly they don't understand the problem, which to me says they need to replace not just a few but a lot of the management around their internet presence.

Facebook has a huge amount of personal information. Wal-Mart has shopping information. If Wal-Mart can link facebook accounts to shopping card accounts, well...

Bob makes a comment saying "just bought a piece of shit water boiler at Wal-Mart". Facebook scans in real time for mentions of Wal-Mart and flags it up. Ten seconds later, someone is looking side by side at Bob's Facebook page and a list of his recent purchases, which store he bought it at and who was on the job

wal mart has these things called brick and mortar stores that a lot of people shop at. they have food and beverages that people usually buy in a store. they also have lots of other things like clothing and toiletries that are easier to buy in a store than online.

why buy my iphone online if i'm going to wal mart to buy some milk and other necessities?

Probably because your not thinking ahead when you go there...Most people who go there are thinking about one thing and get side tracked with buying other things that are in their way to getting to the first thing.

Wal-Mart does not want you to use their website. Online shopping allows for informed decision making: you can easily compare prices of similar goods both within their own catalog and competitor's. You can find product and manufacturer reviews, look at price and sales history, etc. All of that runs counter to Wal-Mart's methodology of preying on underinformed customers. Wal-Mart maintains a low-price reputation by a small subset of inventory. That subset is indeed cheap, but visibly so: poor materials, flimsy construction, awkward designs, etc. But their other inventory isn't priced the same way, typically it's priced higher than you find elsewhere. So people who come for the cheap item but, seeing how crappy it is, go for the "next model up" pay more than they need. People who come for and buy the cheap item but end up with other impulse buys pay more than they need. People who do all their shopping at Wal-Mart because they assume the advertised pricing on the cheap subset is reflective of store-wide prices pay more than they need. Having informed customers would be terrible for their business. Sure, with their tightly integrated supply chain management they could turn a good profit even if they acted more ethically, but Wall Street looks down on executives that grow a business organically.

Wal-Mart's website sucks on a level that is so difficult to describe I would simply advise visiting it to see for yourself.

A while ago I was in a Wal-Mart shopping for a waterproof camera for my sister. I had to see what models were available near where I was staying and email her a list to choose from. I saw that each camera had a little QR code on the price tag sticker below it and figured "oh handy, a link to the product page! I'll copy this to my list!"

I pulled out my phone, scanned it, and it was a link to the Wal-Mart homepage |:-(

not my favorite store, but i've bought clothes at wal mart that have outlasted stuff i bought from the hippy and snobby stores. usually anything from Gap/banana republic is the worst and tears up in a few weeks

some of the $100 jeans i have from lucky and diesel can't last as long as some of my wal mart stuff

"The implications for online privacy in this series of relationships are uncertain."

I think they are very certain. This will, as with every collaboration of large corporations who seek and retain your information, result in increased use of personal (and often private) information to increase the market and profits of the corporation. Any possible benefit to the customer will be inconsequential and very debatable.

Use facebook? Expect a confusing change in privacy policy to follow, with associated double-speak explanation that demonstrates how it's all being done for your benefit, not theirs. Thereafter expect to have a relationship with Walmart on a personal level you may not be comfortable with, whether you shop there or not.

I've been considering killing my Facebook account for a while. This just speeds up the process. I only use it to keep up with Birthdays and to network for local business opportunities. I believe I can find alternative means for those.

Hell, I believe everyone should find an alternative to Facebook since the giant, soul-sucking monster that is Wal-mart is joining forces with them. All hail Great Cthulu!

That won't help once the facial recognition database gets up to speed.I often amuse myself imagining what sort of picture my (outlying) stats have provided to big brother.BeerRaw pizza ingredientsWeird little bits o' hardwarenothing else.I guess they probably have a fairly accurate reading, somehow filling in the blanks with projections from others.

When two or more companies that have no idea what they're doing join forces and convince themselves that, somehow together, they'll master the situation due to "synergy" or some other vague buzzword. It seemed like a lot of this happened when the first dot-com bubble burst, too.

somehow together, they'll master the situation due to "synergy" or some other vague buzzword

It's not hard to imagine social recommendations and an 'add to my Wal*Mart' button where it gets put in a bin for you at your closest Wal*Mart (your Facebook phone having reported its location and used with NFC for instant checkout). You can even leave it in your pocket - the camera in the register can verify its you based on facial recognition from all the photos you've posted.

WalMart and FaceBook offer things that people seem willing to exchange money/information for. You can opt out anytime.

Actually you need friends with common sense (and actual respect for you, though why you'd be friends otherwise is a mystery...) and some technical skill. Otherwise it's quite difficult to prevent Facebook from ever knowing anything about you. If you had this idea that never personally visiting Facebook.com meant never being in Facebook's database, that's demonstrably false.

The average user of Facebook has little or no technical skill and thinks it is useful or valuable to collect superficial acquaintences. They tend not to realize that every "Like" button you see on a non-Facebook site is a tracking device even if it is not clicked. When you access a non-Facebook site with such a "Like" button, there is no opt-out form presented. You need tools like Adblock and NoScript (among others) to frustrate this form of tracking. You first need to be aware of what tracking is and how it works before you can defeat it, of course. For average users, this is hardly "opting out anytime". This is "they aren't even asking me, they're just taking the info they want while hoping I remain ignorant". This is inherently exploitative because it's done without informed consent.

Likewise, the effect Walmart tends to have on local businesses is difficult to opt out of. So is its impact on wages and benefits. Walmart knows how to play the retail game, that's for sure. They are in a stronger bargaining position than the localities they operate in and the workers they employ. They want to keep it that way, which is why they have so adamantly resisted unionization (unions have their own problems but actually would challenge this, and management knows it). Their overall effect tends to be the transfer of wealth out of local communities, rather than the creation of wealth within them. Maybe you're fine with that and maybe you'll make an apology for it, but in either case it's rather hard to simply opt out of.

While I'm sure Walmart's retail sales are probably solid, they kind of seem to be past their glory days somewhat. Many areas still resist a Wal Mart opening, there has been a lot of bad press and some court losses over labor practices, and so on. Lots of competion online from Amazon and in-store from Target, whose stores don't have the look or feel of a third-world bazaar.

Facebook, while still widely used, recently had some bad press about a slight downtick in membership, their IPO was something of a clusterfuck and the stock price has continued to decline as people speculate about their future and ability to generate revenue growth while facing constant bad press over repeated and widely criticized changes that undo privacy settings or expose information users had assumed was private.

So two companies kind of past their peak, facing pressure and uncertainty. I see why they turn to each other, but individually neither one seems to really burnish the reputation of the other, especially for Facebook, for whom a partnership seems to create a small-town, low-income kind of image.

I have been awaiting this for years for my (and everyone's) personal convenience. Yes, we will come up with all sorts of laws and violations, privileges and abuses, and some people will inevitably be wronged. Cars and trucks emit carcinogens but no one is championing going back to horses. Every single comment I've read has been all about the bugaboo paranoia, yet the vast majority of people will benefit from this.

I was hoping the story linked under "Big Data analytics" would be interesting but it wasn't. It only has vague statements and a couple small examples. A much better story is "Target knows you're pregnant" from earlier this year.